Crimes of the Future

As another 21st century art object, not a "movie" which is an early 20th century concept, this delivers everything the brand name (David Cronenberg) promises. Plus it's pretty high-brow. Superior production values but I really think it'a more of a moving painting. When everyone has 4K video projection it could play silently on a wall, slowly changing from pale, wan faces to exotic biomorphics to visceral, pulsating fantasias. If you want date night (unless your date is Amy Taubin) forget it.

I just remembered what this kinda, sorta reminded me of. Quintet, Robert Altman's arty, dystopic from 1979. That wintry society was pre-occupied with the stylized rituals of the titular board game. And everyone was cloaked and draped against the cold with hats and hoods. Similar end-of-world feel.

This flick is off the wall even for Cronenberg. And I'm amazed that such well known actors made this dark and almost plotless film.

It opens withan outrage and ends with a whimper. The dialogue is vague and depressing as is the premise that future art will be of pain and suffering.

65/100

My expectations for the film were completely off. The trailer made me think that the film was going to be one way, but turned out it was the opposite.

While it wasn't as I expected it was still a decent film. It was artistic, dark, twisted, and intriguing. The story had an interesting concept. "Surgery is the new sex". With that in my mind now it really opens a new visual to the film.

The performance was very well done. It's been awhile since I've seen Viggo Mortensen in a film. He was excellent and I enjoyed his performance. Having only seen Léa Seydoux in "James Bond" previously, I thought she did an excellent job as well opposite Viggo. Continuing with the acting performances, this is perhaps the first film that I enjoyed Kristen Stewart's performance. Just her shyness and dark persona made her likeable.

The film does lose a lot interest because it becomes too slow at times and drags on more than it needs to a certain moments. While a slower pace is key to the film it's just too slow.

Overall, there is some good intriguing moments to the film that I struggle to convey into words. A twisted art story involving slicing and dicing the body. Honestly, it was worth seeing in theatres, but I would've preferred to see it on a cheap night.

Thank you for reading my review. I hope it helps you a little in making a decision. Until next time.... Enjoy the show!

Some people in the future muck about with their saucy organs and that's about it. Some of the effects and prosthetics are creative, but some of them are bobbins.

The drama is mundane. There's no suspense, tension or stakes. If all the movie had is a premise, then the body horror needed to be bonkers to give the audience a bit of fun. But it's all too serious. The philosophical aspect is brought to the fore, which is the least interesting thing about it. I like that it's trying something different, but it comes at the cost of good storytelling. A simple thriller element would have balanced the movie nicely. Unfortunately, the plot is too thin to hold any weight.

The sets and cinematography are good. The acting is clunky and the dialogue is waffling, when it's audible. Cronenberg has fallen victim to the trend of dialogue being whispered, mumbled, fried or delivered in an accent so outrageous that it's hard to decipher what anybody's banging on about.

A meandering, middle-of-the-road sci-fi.

Not sure I liked it, not sure I disliked it, but boy oh boy was it a Cronenberg movie, and if you like his style, check it out. My two biggest gripes are that I felt as though it ended too abruptly, and that honestly, I wish it was grosser. Is that weird? Most of the "shocking bits", besides one scene, were in the trailer, which was a bit disappointing. Really not much more that I can say. Great performances!